"Gus Haynes here, Baltimore Sun, City Desk..."
"...my readers have been calling the office asking what was going on in this photograph?...
...you look to be enjoying yourself whatever it was."
OBI-WAN37 said:
I also find it funny that all the trolling the pt-haters did did not get the topic locked but my purely defensive remarks did. Talk about biased. Nice job, moderators.
What trolling? (Do you know what trolling is?). In that thread...
You expressed your personnal opinion about why you think the PT films are okay.
We made detailed, reasonable and objective arguments about why they are demonstrably and seriously flawed.
OBI-WAN37 said:
Ryan McAvoy said:
OBI-WAN37 said:
From the Phantom Menace:
C-3PO: I can assure you they will never get me onto one of those dreadful starships.
I love this!
^ Lazy fan service that only makes sense if you watch the films back to front. Also it makes no sense in the context of the scene but apart from those three things it's brilliant!
So first people say they don't like the films because they cater to kids. Now they say they don't like "fan service"?
What have these two things got in common?
I don't like the clumsy fan-service and I don't like the pandering to a misguided idea of what a child likes. I also don't like Anchovies and Zac Snyder but I don't see how either are connected.
OBI-WAN37 said:
From the Phantom Menace:
C-3PO: I can assure you they will never get me onto one of those dreadful starships.
I love this!
^ Lazy fan service that only makes sense if you watch the films back to front. Also it makes no sense in the context of the scene but apart from those three things it's brilliant!
As I said a bit earlier 'Dues Ex: Human Revolution' on the PS3 is maaahh favourite game. But I was looking at video of and reading reviews of the recent 'Director's Cut' version and was wondering if it was worth an upgrade.
It's another £19.99 on PSN on top of what I've already spent on the game which seems very steep for a glorified patch.
Has anybody upgraded and thought it was worth the money?
TV's Frink said:
OBI-WAN37 said:
Queen Amidala: You're a slave?
Anakin: I'm a person and my name is Anakin.
More awesome dialogue from the Phantom Menace.
Now you're just trolling.
You beat me to that sentiment* Ric.
That is one of the worst lines in TPM, and it doesn't help that Jake Lloyd delivers it so poorly.
(* "The perfume he meant to buy her" - Barry Cryer)
Jaitea said:
Also, CG can look really, realy good, very realistic.....but it all depends how long the artist can spend perfecting the shot, look at the other films ILM were working on around the time of the Prequels,...the money coming in from those other projects must have pushed them up the priority list
J
Just so.
The insistence of GL making every shot an FX shot (In some way or another) must have been a ridiculous workload for ILM. Also George reshooting half of each PT film at the last minute on greenscreen stages must have been a nightmare. You can see the stress and confusion in the faces of the crew in the documentaries.
In contrast, in the behind-the-scenes films on the LOTR trilogy (Shot at roughly the same time) the crew always look like they are having fun. Even if they have to work 3 days straight with no sleep to get the job done because they knew they were doing great work, they still have smiles at the end.
OBI-WAN37 said:
Ryan McAvoy said:
OBI-WAN37 said:
Ryan McAvoy said:
Here's a question just for you to answer...
"Why did they build an (almost) complete set for the Tantive IV interior in ROTS, when they could have CGIed some or all of it?"
If you can give the correct answer you might understand what was so wrong at the heart of the PT (Hint: The reason wasn't because it looked better).
OBI-WAN37 said:
A good description on the (PT) movies overall would be "mind-blowingly fantastic films!"
Anybody want to complete the sentence...
"The PT are mind-blowingly . . . . . . . films"
;-)
"Fantastic". Strange that someone would post such an easy question.
Touche!! You've have done well my young apprentice.
But any response to the Tantive IV question?
I can give you the answer if you don't know.
I just said in the post directly above the one you just made, " I don't quite understand what the mystery-answer question you asked is even asking, but I'm curious, what do you think is the answer?"
^ It's this thing that happens in forums when two posts are written at the same time.
The answer to my question is they had to build the Tantive IV set for ROTS because C3PO was shiny.
The time and cost needed to CGI in the reflections on Threepio meant it was cheaper, and less bother to just knock up a cheap set (And it does look cheap and plasticy next to the 1977 original set). This answer is not my opinion but from the mouths of Lucas and McCallum on various ROTS behind-the-scenes features. This is also the reason why shots involving The Naboo Silver cruisers tended to be physical models and/or sets (Plus Padme's appartment in ROTS needed to be fully built to make Threepio cheaper to do). So again I say, if they could have done it cheaper and easier with something real they did, but if they could have done it all in CGI then it would be. This insistance of putting budget before quality-control lead to CGI R2 in ROTS being Matt instead of Gloss to save the money it would take to add the reflections.
It's a question whose answer speaks volumes about the mentality of the filmmakers on the PT. e.g. "Let's not build as much as we can because it looks better, lets build as little as we can to save time and money".
Side note:
TPM $160
AOTC $145
ROTS $134
^ PT's budget adjusted for inflation. As you can see they spent 15-20 million less on each film. They cut back on expensive sets, costumes, models etc as advances in CGI increased, allowing them to just cheat it in the computer.
OBI-WAN37 said:
Ryan McAvoy said:
Here's a question just for you to answer...
"Why did they build an (almost) complete set for the Tantive IV interior in ROTS, when they could have CGIed some or all of it?"
If you can give the correct answer you might understand what was so wrong at the heart of the PT (Hint: The reason wasn't because it looked better).
OBI-WAN37 said:
A good description on the (PT) movies overall would be "mind-blowingly fantastic films!"
Anybody want to complete the sentence...
"The PT are mind-blowingly . . . . . . . films"
;-)
"Fantastic". Strange that someone would post such an easy question.
Touche!! You've have done well my young apprentice.
But any response to the Tantive IV question?
I can give you the answer if you don't know.
OBI-WAN37 said:
Okay, so I've posted edits embedded in your quotes under each image for each criticism you make. Most of my argument centers around the fact that given the huge amount of locations they used in the prequel trilogy (unlike the original trilogy), even with the budget of a star wars movie I'm guessing it would have cost way too much to model absolutely everything, and also, you said concerning blue-screening in the time of the original trilogy, "there was literally no other way this could be achieved at the time" the same goes for lots of stuff you criticize in the prequel trilogy: aliens with long necks and completely different anatomy from humans that make it literally impossible for actors to portray even with the best makeup. You seem to be throwing absolutely everything that even barely qualifies as an argument at me, however I will admit that you do make a couple of good points. Regardless, the prequel trilogy, with or without too much CGI, are fantastic films.
Your arguments underneath those photos I reposted above are frankly laughable so I can't really summon up the energy needed to respond to them all. But the gist of your answers seemed to be...
"Yes I'll admit there was a sh*t load of CGI in the PT when practical photography and models could have been used but Lucas and McCallum were too cheap and lazy to bother, which is fine"
Here's a question just for you to answer...
"Why did they build an (almost) complete set for the Tantive IV interior in ROTS, when they could have CGIed some or all of it?"
If you can give the correct answer you might understand what was so wrong at the heart of the PT (Hint: The reason wasn't because it looked better).
OBI-WAN37 said:
A good description on the (PT) movies overall would be "mind-blowingly fantastic films!"
Anybody want to complete the sentence...
"The PT are mind-blowingly . . . . . . . films"
;-)
msycamore said:
Ryan McAvoy said:
^ ESB. Matte painting done later of the same base (The 80s equivalant of CGI). Looks 1000 times less convincing, which is why Adywan has reshot this one.
It did however look much more convincing in the original ESB. The reason why it look so fake in the SE is because the shot contains a wipe that was redone in order to avoid the generation loss and grain build up seen in the original film - stuff that did make wonders for matte paintings such as this.
In addition the shot was brightened, making it even less convincing. And lastly in 2004 it was further degrained. You were never supposed to see it that clear. Many other shots have this same problem in the SE. It's what happens when you're dickin' around with classics.
You are of course right, the old-FX shots in the OT often look poor in the SE (Due to hamfisted re-compositing work) and even GOUT (Due to the variable fading of the different composited film layers). A paranoid person would believe they'd been made to look bad, so the new SE CGI shots would look preferable. But a viewing of Harmy's 'restoration' has all the FX shots looking better than in the 'mucked about' SE and the sometimes flawed (IMO) GOUT DVD.
For clarity, here is a screencap of the same frame from Harmy's edition where it looks much better...
...but still it look less convincing than the 'real life' shot I posted earlier.
Personally I adore the old Matte Painting aesthetic but that's more of an opinion, rather than an objective argument of what looks more realistic. For example, I'd take this beautiful Matte painting from 1959's 'Ben-Hur'...
...over this impressive CGI shot from 2000's 'Gladiator'...
Neither look 100% realistic, it's more a question of taste.
OBI-WAN37 said:
Ryan McAvoy said:
CO said:
Wolfman said:
TV's Frink said:
So is the OP gone for good? I find his brand of crazy rather entertaining.
He's headed back to the safety of TFN. Spending his time in....The prequel Trilogy forum where everything is awesome !
I just ventured back to TFN today just to see how crazy that place has gotten and I was banned on my first thread: "At what moment did you realize you didn't like the PT?"
I should have called it, "The Prequels are great, tell me why you love them!" And I guarantee it wouldnt have been locked.
For me, the exact moment it changed from a youth spent dreaming of how great the prequels were sure to be, then gripping the cinema seat arms in rapt excitement about what I was about to witness...
...changed to a sick feeling in my stomach at about 28 seconds into TPM when the Star Wars logo came up and it was the wrong shade of yellow. The first thing that gave me the worrying feeling that the quality control switch for the new films might not be in the 'on' postion.
btw While googling SW the tother day and I stumbled onto a TFN thread about how "People are stupid who think there is a lot of CGI in the PT and there is actually loads of physical models/props etc" (Or something along those lines). It was page after page of posted photos of actors/crew standing around on green/blue screen stages that happened to also feature some real element somewhere. The phrase "Grasping at straws" sprung to mind.
"Grasping at straws"? Seriously? On the first page you see tons of models. To quote my previous post "you can see a model AT-TE in the thread I linked, not to mention models of Mustafar, Naboo Royal Cruiser, a HUGE miniature city of Mois Eisley,the streets of Coruscant, that thing in the second picture down, the huge Geonosian arena, the corridors of the Jedi temple, the huts of the tusken raiders, the podracers, naboo, Kamino, the place where Anakin and Obi-Wan fought Count Dooku, the Trade Federation interior, life-size Anakin's podracer, some different costumes for the aliens on Mustafar, the Podracer stadium, the AAT, Feluccia, the hanger in the Invisible Hand, the Jedi Temple, a life-size Naboo Starfighter, C-3PO half-built, what seems to be half of a life-size podracer for Sebulba, several places where Anakin and Obi-Wan fought eachother, that place on Mustafar where Anakin murdered all those aliens, and if you check in the next link I give they actually used a lot of locations too, and this is probably only a fraction of the stuff they actually used."
Yeah the prequel trilogy had tons of models. And just as many locations as Episodes IV-VI as well, if you check the following link. Just look at how many locations were used for Episodes I-III compared to Episodes IV-VI; the amount is the same. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Star_Wars_filming_locations It even says here on the 11th block down on the list of locations if you read the description next to Mount Etna that they filmed a real volcano in Episode III for Mustafar, that stuff about the prequels using too much CGI is mostly false.
I've seen all the behind-the-scenes PT stuff just like everyone. I know how much was built and how much wasn't. If you mean page 1 of this thread...
http://boards.theforce.net/threads/practical-effects-in-the-prequels-sets-pictures-models-etc.50017310/
...I was saying that "Grasping at straws" would be like posting the following photos in support of your argument...
^ One model (Debatable if it was even used in the finished shots), other 99% of the shot to be CGIed in later.
^ CGI people and CGI Corusscant e.g. 60-70% of the frame CGIed in later.
^ Other 80% of Coruscant CGIed in later.
^ Tiny model built to woefully substitute a real (Expensive) set. Anakin and Padme to be CGIed in later along with a host of CGI creatures.
^ Other 70% of Coruscant CGIed in later.
^ Other 70% of shot CGIed in later.
^ Other 90% of shot CGIed in later (Plus a thousand CGI people).
^ I'm not even gonna comment.
^ Other 90% of shot and people to be CGIed in later.
^ Seriously you are cracking me up here.
^ Other 50% of the shot and CGI droids added later.
I could go on but like I said "Clutching at straws".
btw in that same page these two photos are posted as "evidence" that the OT was no different...
^ Universally derided as the worst shot in ROTJ. It sticks out like a sore thumb and only damages your argument. I'm one of ROTJ's biggest fans over here but I can admit that shot stank and would have been better had it not been cheated on a Bluescreen. Clearly Lucas with eyesight decaying thought this was the way of the future.
^ Real people, sitting on a real prop, optically composited over real footage, so no, not really comparible. Besides, there was literally no other way this could be achieved at the time and since the sequence runs at about a gazillion miles an hour nobody notices any flaws (Not me anyway). But you'd have to be insane to use the same technique to film slow shots that could easily be achieved with practicle photography... oh wait GL did on the PT in almost every shot.
Here is a little example...
^ ESB. Everything is real, real people, real ships, real props on location. Looks f*ckin' stunning!
^ ESB. Matte painting done later of the same base (The 80s equivalant of CGI). Looks 1000 times less convincing, which is why Adywan has reshot this one.
Fortunately every oportunity was taken in the OT to shoot it live, in camera and 100% for real (So that last shot is a rare exception). The exact oposit was true for the PT. If it could be CGIed in for less money than it cost to build it... it was.
CO said:
Wolfman said:
TV's Frink said:
So is the OP gone for good? I find his brand of crazy rather entertaining.
He's headed back to the safety of TFN. Spending his time in....The prequel Trilogy forum where everything is awesome !
I just ventured back to TFN today just to see how crazy that place has gotten and I was banned on my first thread: "At what moment did you realize you didn't like the PT?"
I should have called it, "The Prequels are great, tell me why you love them!" And I guarantee it wouldnt have been locked.
For me, the exact moment it changed from a youth spent dreaming of how great the prequels were sure to be, then gripping the cinema seat arms in rapt excitement about what I was about to witness...
...changed to a sick feeling in my stomach at about 28 seconds into TPM when the Star Wars logo came up and it was the wrong shade of yellow. The first thing that gave me the worrying feeling that the quality control switch for the new films might not be in the 'on' postion.
btw While googling SW the tother day and I stumbled onto a TFN thread about how "People are stupid who think there is a lot of CGI in the PT and there is actually loads of physical models/props etc" (Or something along those lines). It was page after page of posted photos of actors/crew standing around on green/blue screen stages that happened to also feature some real element somewhere. The phrase "Grasping at straws" sprung to mind.
TV's Frink said:
Ryan McAvoy said:
"Spike here (From late-80s/early-90s ITV children's television comedy-drama 'Press Gang'), the Junior Gazette..."
"...I know we all go through some tough patches in our lives but what... if you don't mind me asking... was happening in your life during this period...
?"
At that point in my life, I was still learning how to avoid posting broken images...it appears you are still in that stage.
"Lynda Day here (From late-80s/early-90s ITV children's television comedy-drama 'Press Gang'), Chief-Editor of the Junior Gazette..."
"...I apologise for the frankly unprofessional behaviour of my junior colleague James (That's his real name not "Spike" I ask you, kids!?... maybe if he took off his Shades he would see better!).
So once again... if you don't mind me asking... what was happening in your life during this clearly troubled period...
?"
"Spike here (From late-80s/early-90s ITV children's television comedy-drama 'Press Gang'), the Junior Gazette..."
"...I know we all go through some tough patches in our lives but what... if you don't mind me asking... was happening in your life during this period...
?"
Tyrphanax said:
Ryan McAvoy said:
CO said:
I always thought the Prequels should have been 1 movie, and I think it would have been alot more accepted among the SW fanbase. Coppola was able to tell Vito Corleone's backstory in one movie, why did we need 3 movies to see the backstory of Anakin Skywalker other then to cash in on the SW name?
If Lucas would have done 1 Prequel movie, he could have crafted a 3 hour no holds barred movie where it would have been all red meat to the fans, and we wouldn't have to deal with pointless exposition that makes the trilogy move like molasses sometimes.
When Puzo died he and Coppola were planning on a 4th film that would have told Vito's long missing backstory between the end of GF2 and the start of GF1, so this analogy doesn't totally work.
I agree it could have been covered in one movie but in a galaxy as big as SW 3 movies should have still been exciting and fast paced. Obi Wan was barely in TPM and Anakin wasn't developed at all either. Lucas could have stuffed all 3 of the PT with exciting adventures we never saw (The "Nest of Gundarks"? or "That business on Cato Nemoidia"?) or call me crazy but he could have shown us what happened in the bloody CLONE WARS?!?
Seeing the Clone Wars was the main reason I bought cinema tickets to those films. But all we got was Yoda saying they'd started in AOTC, one battle above Coruscant in ROTS, a couple of montages and then they were over. What happened to 'Episode II.5: The Clone Wars' Where we spent 2 hours having fun and beginning to actually like our two heroes Anakin and Obi-Wan?
Hell no!
If it ain't a live action film it's just so much EU filler IMO. But at least the first mini-show was wonderfully stylish and did it's own unique thing which I liked. It didn't feel like the OT but it didn't feel like the PT either, thank god.
Neither is a substitute for the "Missing" Clone Wars film(s) that I spent my youth dreaming about.
Dr Hunter S. Thompson here, Jersey Shore Herald..."
"...I see from this photo...
...that you used to work in security in your younger days before being promoted to the position of personal pilot to the Queen. Tell me, when you were chasing criminals through the streets of Theed, how fast did you catch 'em?"
TV's Frink said:
More likely I'll use this.
Impressive, most impressive. Thanks for that link.
DuracellEnergizer said:
Clint's characters is ...
*SPOILER BELOW!*
... heavily implied to be the ghost of Marshal Jim Duncan, come back for revenge against those who conspired in his murder (the prostitute among them).
*MORE SPOILERS!*
Yes you are probably right or else he's an avenging Angel. Renaming the town hell, the fires and the painting the town red is very old-testament in either case.
I do like movies that let the audience add their own interpretations. Recent films to pull this off like 'Drive', 'Gravity', 'Life of Pi' have all worked very well for me.
timdiggerm said:
EyeShotFirst said:
FanFiltration said:
High Planes Drifter 8/10
As much as I love Clint's western years, I can't watch that film. First 10 minutes were good, and then he rapes some woman. While one could argue she had it coming, being rude, it's still rape.
I find that characters in fiction frequently do not act morally.
Never mind "she had it coming" which...oh wow man....wow.
Yeeees, I'm gonna hope those words were ill chosen (Or a bad joke). Anyway, quite a few years since I've seen HPD but isn't...
*SPOILER BELOW!*
...Clint's character literally the devil in that movie? Doesn't seem like behaviour that would be out of character for Lucifer.
EyeShotFirst said:
Thanks man!!
You nailed the font!
btw y'all here is my desktop sized compilation of all the Star Wars LPs I've mashed up in this thread so far.
^ Click image to download the fullsize 1920x1080 version if you so wish.
Bingowings said:
Warbler said:
Tobar said:
So....the Master and the War Chief. One and the same?
it has never been indicated so in the series.
Correct but for the reasons I mentioned earlier it's a popular fan theory (and also my personal preferred arc for the character).
However the character of Rodan, this one :
Ahh! I happen to be halfway through watching that serial ^ (The Invasion of Time) with Rodan in, right now... spoilers alert! ;-)
Costume looks very good (I like the silk jacket lining in 'Pertwee red') but the photo is awful. It's badly lit and very awkwardly posed... sack the photographer but retain the services of the costumier. It has a slighly militaristic dress-uniform vibe to my eyes, with the navy blue frock coat and highly polished boots.
I hope they do the 'dressing up box' scene (They usually do) as it's always a lot of fun.
"Eliza Cassan, Picus TV News here..."
"...you really scrubbed up in your video... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmTtQ4UEpwg, what's next in your music career?"
"Hi Roger Mellie ('The man on the telly') from the Viz Comic here..."
"...what is 'Ric' short for anyway, for f***s sake?"
